12 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
Excellent, beautiful little short
15 April 2004
I have a hard time describing this short. It's a drama, it's beautifully shot, and the pacing is gentle. The acting is first-rate, even from the child actor, and the writing is pretty solid. Weaver creates a world for this child, a distant, alienated world where the child and audience feel one step away from everyone else. Don't let that interfere with your viewing, though --it's all part of Weaver's masterful direction. The cinematography is outstanding, with shadow, light, and colour combined to create a dreamy world for the boy's home, and bright, almost harsh lighting and colours for the scene at the boy's school. I recommend A Boy's Own Story if you get a chance to see it.

Ed Miller
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Uneven effort, but it looks great!
19 March 2004
There are some great things about Dermott's Quest --the opening scene at Dermott's boring job as a security guard for one, but there are moments that, for me, make this a mediocre short. The main problem is the writing. Some of the dialog is pretty bad, and even with someone as talented as Sarah Polley saying a clunker of a line doesn't make the line work. The script doesn't rise above cliche (the trick dream sequence is too obvious to work, for example). The story itself is interesting, and most of the film is enjoyable, so perhaps bringing in another writer or using a story editor could have made this a truly special film. The performances are good, particularly Polley as Gwen and Raoul Bhaneja as the leads, the cinematography is excellent, and there are some laugh-out-loud moments. This short looks really, really good --no information on the DP or the production designer listed here, which is too bad. I look forward to seeing more of Grimur Ardal's work.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A fun light comedy
23 February 2004
This isn't the funniest movie ever made, but it has some charm to it. It's a light, romantic comedy with some great performances in it, plus a moose. The writing is a little flat at times, but the actors make the best of the material. Gene Hackman has a great talent for making weak lines seem stronger than they really are. Ray Romano is better when he's let loose from scripted lines, Maura Tierney plays the smartest (and most realistic) character in the movie. Locals Jessica Holmes and Paul Bates appear as Tierney's and Romano's sidekicks, respectively, but Bates gets more lines and opportunity to shine.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Amazing
23 February 2004
It's impossible to describe this movie. There is a plot, but it doesn't get in the way of the characters. And the characters are both theatrical and real. The Imperial Rome of Nero seems like a large soundstage, but you don't mind that at all. Just see it, keep an open mind, and let it wash over you.

You'll see what I mean.
1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Swept Away (2002)
1/10
So Bad It's Fun
16 February 2004
This movie is one of the worst I've ever seen. I saw it at a house party, where it created great fun due to the heckling from the audience. I think Guy Ritchie gave up while shooting and knew it wasn't that good. Best line: "Here's my refrigerator," although I may not have remembered it correctly due to blood-alcohol levels being as they were.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
SPOILER: Satire Needs Sharper Edge, But Has Great Moments
2 February 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I saw Network the night before I saw Hollywood North, so I went into it expecting something along the same lines. As a satire, Hollywood North doesn't swipe its targets with a scalpel; the movie doesn't commit to its subject matter enough to cross the line from comedy to satire.

This is too bad given the great performances in this movie. This is the first movie I've seen where I didn't hate Matthew Modine, and the rest of the cast is great, especially Deborah Kara Unger and John Neville. . The faults with this movie are in the writing, which failed to take very many chances.

But this movie is well worth sitting through for the finale. After the funniest armed standoff I've ever seen, the big American star, modelled on John Wayne, blows up his own trailer, bringing the production of the movie within the movie to an end.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The Best of the Series
29 January 2004
This is the best of the Pink Panther movies. Peter Sellers was at his best in this, making comedy not with the over-the-top antics of the later Panther capers but with the smaller, character-driven moments. His Clouseau here is a magnificent combination of arrogance, fear of embarrassment, kindness, and stupidity.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Not the original, but good in its own way
20 January 2004
The mini-series finally aired here in Canada nearly a month after its U.S. debut.

I am a fan of the original series, mostly because of its campiness, enept attempts at science and technology, and the overwrought dialog delivered by wooden actors. It was a strange mix of cutting edge special effects, T&A, and network family values. But towards the end of the first (and final) season, the show seemed to start finding its feet. The two episodes with Patrick Macnee and the last episode were much, much better than the rushed episodes earlier. Strange to think that any critique of the mini-series must begin with an acknowledgement of the original show, but the same thing will have to be done whenever someone decides to remake Star Wars down the road. The new mini-series is good in its own way. I know fans of the original series are upset by the changes, but this isn't a remake. The science and technology on the mini-series is grounded more in reality than in 70's new age/disco fashion, and it's a grim, gritty show. I like the sets, the CGI is pretty good (we actually see the Vipers leaving their launch tubes from space rather than somewhere on the Galactica, a shot impossible to composite in 1978), and the mood is serious and grim. The writing is better, the acting much better. The characters are rounded out more, and are more realistic, coming across not as two-dimensional TV characters but as fleshed out, backstory-laden people. The biggest mistake, though, is the change of Starbuck from a man to a woman in the mini-series. I like the character, and the actor playing her has a lot of fun, but I think, to balance the seriousness of the other characters better, the character needs to be cocky, cynical, and hedonistic. The new Starbuck is cocky but is as serious and dedicated as Apollo and Adama. The die-hard fans of the original series may yearn for disco boots and mumbo-jumbo jargon, but this is the best new sci-fi project I've seen in a long time.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Snowboard Academy (1997 Video)
2/10
Well, It Could Have Been A Lot Worse! (SPOILER)
10 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
As caveat, I have to admit at the onset that I went to school with James Salisko, who got the job of adding the jokes to the script and appears as the surly bartender. Salisko is a great guy, and he needed to pay the rent, so don't blame the writers --this is a producers' project from the get-go. This is the only snowboarding movie I've ever sat through, and it will likely be my last. It suffers from bad acting and bad writing, but the cast seem to be having fun just the same. Probably one of those sets where it was a lot of fun to hang out, but everyone knew the movie was a turkey from the get-go. The plot is a long-lost cousin of King Lear, but it doesn't rise above the cliche very often. With some veteran comic actors to keep things moving, a few token movie "stars" to put bums in seats, and great footage of the Laurentians, it's certainly pretty too look at. Maybe next time I watch, I'll keep the volume off and scan through the dialog scenes.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A piece of crap but at least it's set in Canada
21 November 2003
Warning: Spoilers
SPOILER There are a number of good things about this movie, but it's not the writing, performances or anything else. First, it is a movie shot in Canada that is actually set in Canada. Second, it employed a number of up-and-coming Canadian actors who should be better known, Harland Williams in particular. I don't know who taught Rosanna Arquette the French Canadian accent, but either she was taught by someone who can't teach or doesn't know the accent, or she just couldn't do it properly. It has to be the single worst Quebecois accent in the history of motion pictures. Otherwise, the movie's not much better than a typical American sitcom. Bruce Willis and Matthew Perry played these roles better on Friends. The ending is pretty predictable, but, as a saving grace, Amanda Peet gets naked.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Stinker proves why German cinema faded out by 1970's
30 May 2003
I first saw Grichische Feigen, translated into The Fruit Is Ripe, on pay TV while at university in the 1980's. As far as soft-core porn goes, this has the requisite nudity, sex, and great scenery you'd expect from a low-budget production. The acting isn't as bad as you'd think, there are no serious gaffes in the production (like mike boom shadows or editing mistakes), but the god-awful dialog takes away any redeeming value this may have had if the director, Siggi Gotz who thankfully doesn't seem to have produced anything since 1988, had had any talent in raising this dreck above the mundane. There's the potential, given the Betty Verges actually possesses screen presence, that Gotz could have made something meanful, but he didn't. Unless you're in the mood for softcore porn, skip this one.
14 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
SPOILER Why sci-fi does better in syndication
25 March 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Skip Mission: Galactica and watch the original Living Legend episodes instead. The network took parts 1 & 2 of Living Legend and jammed them into one plot with the awful Fire In Space episode. Although Galactica suffered from network-controlled writing and a lack of time to prepare for a proper production, Living Legend is the best of the 1978 TV series. Fire in Space, on its own, is one of the worst episodes. As a historical note, watch Galactica, the original Star Trek, and then the revival Trek series, and you'll see the difference in quality between network-produced sci-fi and syndicated sci-fi.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed

 
\n \n \n\n\n